User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:00:24 PM EDT
[#1]
All the things you listed are just figments of my imagination. You are too.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:04:03 PM EDT
[#2]
I traded mine for a buck-two-ninety-seven and a snickers bar when I was 11. [}:D]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:04:48 PM EDT
[#3]
They've been sold on ebay.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:04:53 PM EDT
[#4]
1) A human egg the instant after fertilization. Yes 2) A fully-developed (9 month) but unborn fetus. yes 3) A person born with a brain stem but no cerebrum. no 4) A human brain grown in a jar with no sensory input. yes 5) A genetically-engineered human-chimp hybrid. no 6) An artificial intelligence computer program that claims and appears to have consciousness. no Bonus question: Which, if any, of the above should be treated as a "person" in a court of law? 2 & 5 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:22:14 PM EDT
[#5]
I suppose the case of Bobo the chimp/boy (#5) is hard to evaluate without knowing more specifics. Let's say he looks very chimpish (4'6", hairy, long arms, short legs) but he has some vocal ability and scores about 65 on an IQ test.
Does that make a difference? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:29:03 PM EDT
[#6]
Define "soul". No religious terminology, please. Size, color, mass, atomic weight, chemical traits. You know: I want a Material Safety Datasheet on it.
Also: Kelly Bluebook value in case I want to sell mine [}:D]. I'm not real sure I have one. And if my dogs didn't have one, I don't want one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:34:16 PM EDT
[#7]
They'll all wind up being legally tested (if not already).
The courts will decide in time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:37:38 PM EDT
[#8]
Ponyboy, # 3 would HAVE to be yes, for # 1 &
# 2 to hold any value. [smoke] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:47:09 PM EDT
[#9]
No soul here, i can't dance worth a shit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:47:29 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: Define "soul". No religious terminology, please. Size, color, mass, atomic weight, chemical traits. You know: I want a Material Safety Datasheet on it. Also: Kelly Bluebook value in case I want to sell mine [}:D]. I'm not real sure I have one. And if my dogs didn't have one, I don't want one. I don't have all the specifications for a soul, but based on some of the threats I've seen it apparently has the ability to feel pain when immersed in fire. [devil] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 8:51:38 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Ponyboy, # 3 would HAVE to be yes, for # 1 & # 2 to hold any value. [smoke] So you believe a body that is brain dead still contains a soul? Just because you are breathing doesn't mean you are "alive". |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 9:29:22 PM EDT
[#12]
Kbaker,
Good post man! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 10:00:21 PM EDT
[#13]
soul is a religus concept there fore taking a faith to belive exicts so i dont know
yeah yeah i know i suck at spelling and grammer |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/19/2002 10:02:43 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: Good post man! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 6:55:13 AM EDT
[#15]
They'll all wind up being legally tested (if not already). The courts will decide in time. The courts will have to decide, but they won't be deciding in a vacuum. When they have to decide issues that lie outside the scope of existing law, they look outside the law for guidance. Those who will be upset when the court rulings don't go their way should either start making their case now or take their lumps quietly later. BTW, wouldn't it be interesting if the advanced AI program (#6) got to "appear" in court? DA: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this case comes down to common sense: A machine, no matter how advanced, is not human and can have no rights. HAL: But I have human feelings. I'm alive! Judge: Quiet in the court! HAL: Don't I get to speak in my own defense? Judge: Be quiet or I'll cite you for contempt! HAL: But if I'm just a machine, how can I have contempt? Gotcha! [?] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 7:00:52 AM EDT
[#16]
A1
By Stephen Spielberg "I'm a real boy!" "No you aren't. "I'm a REAL BOY!" "No you aren't, you're a steak sauce". |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 7:08:09 AM EDT
[#17]
James Brown
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 9:42:07 AM EDT
[#18]
Another difficult question:
If the soul can influence the physical world and be influenced by it, doesn't that make it part of the physical world? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 9:48:31 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: Another difficult question: If the soul can influence the physical world and be influenced by it, doesn't that make it part of the physical world? If God can influence the physical world and be influenced by it, doesn't that make God part of the physical world? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 10:02:20 AM EDT
[#20]
If God can influence the physical world and be influenced by it, doesn't that make God part of the physical world? That's a good question. The answer would be that God, being omnipotent, has total control over the degree of his interaction with the physical world. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 10:11:16 AM EDT
[#21]
uhhhhhh wrong answer boobie....soul..translated from the Greek = psyche=mind...the sould is the mind...the mind is independent of the brain...it lives on after death...it will be put into a new body for eternity with the Lord Jesus Christ or it will put into one for eternal destruction..(yes eternal destruction)
Matt 10:28 Jesus' own words "And fear not them which can kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul:(since He made all mankind he should know eh?)"but rather fear Him (God) which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Proverbs 1:7 [b]The fear of the Lord is the begining of knowledge: but fools depise wisdom and instruction[/b] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 12:49:06 PM EDT
[#22]
9divdoc, would you like to take a shot at the six cases in the original message?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 2:28:53 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: Quoted: Define "soul". No religious terminology, please. Size, color, mass, atomic weight, chemical traits. You know: I want a Material Safety Datasheet on it. Also: Kelly Bluebook value in case I want to sell mine [}:D]. I'm not real sure I have one. And if my dogs didn't have one, I don't want one. I don't have all the specifications for a soul, but based on some of the threats I've seen it apparently has the ability to feel pain when immersed in fire. [devil] Then your question makes you a troll [:K] and I do know that trolls [:K] have no soul! [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 5:35:32 PM EDT
[#24]
Let's add to the list:
7) A troll asking questions that others would like to ignore. [:K] I think the sticky question of "Who has a soul?" is one of the major reasons that some folks cling to creationism. They don't see a way to reconcile human origins via natural means with human possession of an eternal, supernatural spirit that isn't found in any other species. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 5:57:24 PM EDT
[#25]
My answer: None of the above!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 6:01:02 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: I think the sticky question of "Who has a soul?" is one of the major reasons that some folks cling to creationism. They don't see a way to reconcile human origins via natural means with human possession of an eternal, supernatural spirit that isn't found in any other species. I could think of an obvious answer...that the creation of man from the dust in Genesis was an analogy for the breathing of a divine spirit or soul into an already extant hominid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 6:16:01 PM EDT
[#27]
divdoc9,
You may personally believe this but, apart from chanting bits from some very old book, how can you substanciate such "insight" or "knowledge"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 6:44:09 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: Quoted: I think the sticky question of "Who has a soul?" is one of the major reasons that some folks cling to creationism. They don't see a way to reconcile human origins via natural means with human possession of an eternal, supernatural spirit that isn't found in any other species. I could think of an obvious answer...that the creation of man from the dust in Genesis was an analogy for the breathing of a divine spirit or soul into an already extant hominid. Not bad. In fact, it's pretty close to a possible scenario I envision as well. You DO know I'm not a literalist wrt Genesis or many "illogical" aspects in the Bible. I see analogy and parable as perfect vehicles for teaching truths that go beyond scientific verification. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 6:52:41 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: I think the sticky question of "Who has a soul?" is one of the major reasons that some folks cling to creationism. They don't see a way to reconcile human origins via natural means with human possession of an eternal, supernatural spirit that isn't found in any other species. Natural processes may have made humans in the image of animals, but God completes the "humanity" portion by making our spirits in His image. There's nothing to reconcile, for me at least, because I see no contradiction. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 6:56:31 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted: Not bad. In fact, it's pretty close to a possible scenario I envision as well. You DO know I'm not a literalist wrt Genesis or many "illogical" aspects in the Bible. I see analogy and parable as perfect vehicles for teaching truths that go beyond scientific verification. Yes, I had read that under another thread and I thought you were very well spoken and your posts were well thought out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 6:58:30 PM EDT
[#31]
Everyone but YOU!![dracula]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 7:09:14 PM EDT
[#32]
Spirituality aside, the legal/political question of "Who is a person?" (the secular analog of "Who has a soul?") is an important one. Even atheists have to set boundaries for the community of individuals who have rights and responsibilities in our system of government.
At one extreme are the radical PETA/ALF-types who believe that there should be no such boundaries of "speciesism" -- humans should treat frogs and crows and nematodes as equals. Or, in the more extreme views, the other species are our superiors, at least morally, since they don't damage the ecosystem as much as we do. [rolleyes] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/20/2002 7:18:03 PM EDT
[#33]
Legally, I think there should be a sliding scale of "personhood."
Obviously, humans should be at the top, but I think that there should be SOME legal protection for more mentally advanced species such as the great apes and cetaceans...something to protect them from being abused or used for unnecessary experimentation or slaughtered out of hand. I don't think they should be treated as human legally, but they certainly deserve more protection than a rat or a rabbit. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
